Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 1719 (MAD)

CHOPARD BUILDERS (P. ) LTD. v. DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, SINGANALLUR CIRCLE, COIMBATORE.

2008-06-11

ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA

body2008
JUDGMENT A. K. GANGULY, C.J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. These writ appeals have been filed challenging an order passed by the learned single judge, dated September 17, 2007. Subject-matter of the challenge was an order passed by the assessing authority under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. We need to consider the merits of the case, as in view of the admitted position against the order of the assessment officer, statutory appeal is provided. We just remind ourselves of the repeated directions given by the apex court that in the revenue matters, the taxing statute itself is a complete code and the writ court should not ordinarily interfere unless the assessee had exhausted all his statutory remedies. In view of this well-settled principle, we direct the appellant to file an appeal within a period of three weeks from today before the appellate authority. If the appeal is filed within that period, the appellate authority will consider the appeal on merit by condoning the delay in filing the appeal in view of the fact that the writ petition was kept pending in this court since 2007. We rather make it clear that the appellate authority will decide all the points of controversy without remanding any issue to the assessing officer. In doing so, the appellate authority will not be in any way influenced by any observations made by the learned single judge of this court. The entire matter is left to the discretion of the appellate authority. Writ appeals are disposed of with the above directions without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions are closed.